Go to a specific date

Explore

The Public Inspection page
on FederalRegister.gov
offers a preview of documents scheduled to appear in the next day's
Federal Register issue. The Public Inspection page may also
include documents scheduled for later issues, at the request
of the issuing agency.

Document Details

Enhanced Content - Table of Contents

This tables of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the
headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents.
This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links
has no substantive legal effect.

Enhanced Content - Sharing

Enhanced Content - Document Print View

Enhanced Content - Document Print View

Enhanced Content - Document Tools

These tools are designed to help you understand the official document
better and aid in comparing the online edition to the print edition.

These markup elements allow the user to see how the document follows the
Document Drafting Handbook
that agencies use to create their documents. These can be useful
for better understanding how a document is structured but
are not part of the published document itself.

AGENCY:

SUMMARY:

On October 2, 2009, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the Federal Register the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain preserved mushrooms from the People's Republic of China (PRC) for Linyi City Kangfa Foodstuff Drinkable Co., Ltd. (Kangfa). See Certain Preserved Mushrooms From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review,73 FR 50946 (October 2, 2009) (Preliminary Results). We gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on the Start Printed Page 65521Preliminary Results, and received no comments. We also made no changes to the preliminary results for these final results. Therefore, the final results do not differ from the preliminary results.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

We published the preliminary results for this new shipper review on October 2, 2009. In the preliminary results the Department stated that interested parties were to submit case briefs within 30 days of publication of the preliminary results and rebuttal briefs within five days after the due date for filing case briefs. See Preliminary Results at 50951. No interested party submitted a case or rebuttal brief.

Period of Review

The period of review (POR) is February 1, 2008, through January 31, 2009.

Scope of the Order

The products covered by this order are certain preserved mushrooms, whether imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. The certain preserved mushrooms covered under this order are the species Agaricus bisporus and Agaricus bitorquis. “Certain Preserved Mushrooms” refers to mushrooms that have been prepared or preserved by cleaning, blanching, and sometimes slicing or cutting. These mushrooms are then packed and heated in containers including, but not limited to, cans or glass jars in a suitable liquid medium, including, but not limited to, water, brine, butter or butter sauce. Certain preserved mushrooms may be imported whole, sliced, diced, or as stems and pieces. Included within the scope of this order are “brined” mushrooms, which are presalted and packed in a heavy salt solution to provisionally preserve them for further processing.[1]

Excluded from the scope of this order are the following: (1) All other species of mushroom, including straw mushrooms; (2) all fresh and chilled mushrooms, including “refrigerated” or “quick blanched mushrooms;” (3) dried mushrooms; (4) frozen mushrooms; and (5) “marinated,” “acidified,” or “pickled” mushrooms, which are prepared or preserved by means of vinegar or acetic acid, but may contain oil or other additives.

The merchandise subject to this order is classifiable under subheadings: 2003.10.0127, 2003.10.0131, 2003.10.0137, 2003.10.0143, 2003.10.0147, 2003.10.0153 and 0711.51.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive.

Separate Rates

In proceedings involving non-market economy (NME) countries, the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to review in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.

In the preliminary results, we found that Kangfa demonstrated its eligibility for separate rate status. We received no comments from interested parties regarding Kangfa's separate rate status. In these final results of review, we continue to find the evidence placed on the record by Kangfa demonstrates an absence of government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to Kangfa's exports of the merchandise under review. Thus, we have determined that Kangfa is eligible to receive a separate rate.

Changes Since the Preliminary Results

We made no changes to the preliminary results.

Combination Rate

In new shipper reviews, the Department may, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.107(b), establish a combination cash deposit rate for each combination of the exporter and its supplying producer(s). See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review,67 FR 72139 at 72140 (December 4, 2002); Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review: Certain In-Shell Raw Pistachios From Iran,68 FR 353 at 354 (January 3, 2003); and Certain Forged Stainless Steel Flanges From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review,68 FR 351 (January 3, 2003). The Department has determined that a combination rate is appropriate in this case, as Kangfa is both the producer and exporter of the subject merchandise. Therefore, the Department will include in its cash deposit instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) appropriate language to enforce these final results of new shipper review on the basis of a combination rate involving Kangfa as both the producer and exporter of the subject merchandise.

Final Results of Review

The Department has determined that the following margin exists for the period February 1, 2008, through January 31, 2009:

Exporter/Manufacturer

Weighted-Average margin (Percentage)

Linyi City Kangfa Foodstuff Drinkable Co., Ltd.

0.00

Assessment Rates

Pursuant to these final results, the Department determined, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. The Department intends to issue assessment instructions for Kangfa to CBP 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of new shipper review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), we calculated importer-specific (or customer) ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of the dumping margins calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales. We will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review if any importer-specific (or customer) assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis.

Cash Deposit Requirements

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of these final results of new shipper review for all shipments of subject merchandise by Kangfa entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) Start Printed Page 65522of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act): (1) For subject merchandise produced and exported by Kangfa, the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for subject merchandise exported by Kangfa, but not manufactured by Kangfa, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the PRC-wide rate (i.e., 198.63 percent); and (3) for subject merchandise manufactured by Kangfa, but exported by any party other than Kangfa, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the exporter. These cash deposit requirements will remain in effect until further notice.

Reimbursement of Duties

This notice also serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this POR. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties.

Administrative Protective Orders

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

This new shipper review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(h).

Start Signature

Dated: December 4, 2009.

Ronald K. Lorentzen,

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.

End SignatureEnd Supplemental Information

Footnotes

1.
On June 19, 2000, the Department affirmed that “marinated,” “acidified,” or “pickled” mushrooms containing less than 0.5 percent acetic acid are within the scope of the antidumping duty order. See Recommendation Memorandum—Final Ruling of Request by Tak Fat, et al. for Exclusion of Certain Marinated, Acidified Mushrooms from the Scope of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China,” dated June 19, 2000. On February 9, 2005, this decision was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. See Tak Fat v. United States, 396 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2005).